Flyer5 wrote:I still think the people that are so set against people carrying guns should wear t-shirts that say so when they go out. They should let people know that they do not want anyone but a police officer to save them against a criminal with a gun or other lethal weapons. Some crimes are prevented because criminals do not know who may be carrying a firearm. Bumper stickers on their vehicles as well. Time to put up or shut up, I say.

KLook wrote:Yeah, they are ridiculous. But they are supposed to be. I can take that.

NM, I read the 3 page piece from the kind, mild, worldly, reasonable individual from ABC. My question is what is the true cost of gun ownership? I know what I think he means. And why do American fear so much? His words not mine. That is what my sister asked me rather pointedly when she found I was carrying on a daily basis. Nothing when I'm carrying I told her. Do you suppose they were as friendly when Jack the Ripper was tearing up London? The whole British Isles are about the size of New England and they have 4 distinct groups that have fought for centuries. They still are fighting actually. It was a feel good piece describing the miniscule odds of being in a situation requiring a gun. But it is like winning the lottery, someone is going to need that gun. And he refuses to acknowledge the times they are used to diffuse a situation and not reported or outright protect someone. He is after all working for the MSM. he did not want to get into statistics, just that we should all become kinder and accept our fate if/when the wolf comes to the door. For the benefit of the larger society, just let the wolf have his.

BAAAAAAAAA! I'll keep mine thanks.

Kevin

I am sure it has been mentioned here somewhere. But can you imagine the Black Market that will spring up and the criminalization of more people? And the boost to drug gangs and other groups who will profit from this and then we have to spend more money on incarceration and enforcement? What is that the cost of no gun ownership by Gov. breaking the Constitution?

For instance I am not into old cars, but just because the old cars do not have seat belts and have 427's in them, am I supposed to deny someone who enjoys those things the pleasure in enjoying their little hobby? I mean someone could use on and drive it into a hotel or something and kill lots of people...that is the mentality the ban-gun side makes for an argument. Are we supposed to ban old cars because they are not subjected to crumple-zones, crash testing and collapsible steering wheels...why they could go out of control and kill people on the highway. The argument is ludicrous when you apply the same mentality to everything.

Myself I am not into guns and hunting...I figure I am a farmer and just lazy, and rather then chase my meals, I like to coral them inside fences which saves a lot of walking. But in order to get by with my sheep farm, I have to thin the coyote population out. I do that by relying on people that do love guns,and thanks to a great community, they enjoy their hunting on a pretty big chunk of land, and I can have a viable farm since coyotes, porcupine and a host of other animals are reduced; with no money exchanging hands between me and the hunters.

In my opinion, they have a right to enjoy their hobby as much as I have a right to farm sheep, and when you infringe upon their rights; by dictating which type of guns they can have, what type of bullets, and inflate the cost of bullets, it ultimately affects a lot of things that you would not normally think of.

I have said this before; all government regulation began with a well meaning agenda, but there are far reaching consequences for it. I have never seen anything the Government has not got involved with that they have not royally screwed up. Gun control is no different...even if I m not a gun carrying member of the NRA.

As a Foster Parent I have to take care of kids that have nightmares for childhoods. One such child was gang-raped and one day she surprised me; she said that she loved the school here because we have a armed police officer at our school at all times. With the Officer there, she just felt safer because she had someone to run to in case she ever needed help.

I talked to the Officer's Superior and told him this, and he said that what they found was, by having an officer at school, he acted as an intermediate between the school and the kids. When they send kids down to see the principal, he would talk to them, and being a safe guy to talk to, a lot of issues were fixed. Because of the respect, sense of authority and strong presence, kids respected the officer. Granted that man is astounding because he had the right personality, but boy it really works here.

I realize mandating a police officer in school is replete with problems, but I see having an armed officer in more schools would be advantageous. I know that in this VERY rural location, having an armed police officer within the school makes my children far more safe.

I have long suspected that certain types of people become cops because of their past. In rural areas you can pigeon hole the emergency people much of the time. I have cousins I suspect had a rough upbringing and they went into law enforcement and married law enforcement and became EMT's etc.

Exactly, they do not have to be police officers, just the right personality.

There is a hidden nugget in my story too...when we see people and situations that make a positive difference, we need to go to their Supervisors and School Boards and state the positive influence they are having on kids. I took time out of my day to talk to that police officer because I was afraid the police department would cut the budget for that officer to be there.

Flyer5 wrote:I still think the people that are so set against people carrying guns should wear t-shirts that say so when they go out. They should let people know that they do not want anyone but a police officer to save them against a criminal with a gun or other lethal weapons. Some crimes are prevented because criminals do not know who may be carrying a firearm. Bumper stickers on their vehicles as well. Time to put up or shut up, I say.

Flyer5 wrote:I still think the people that are so set against people carrying guns should wear t-shirts that say so when they go out. They should let people know that they do not want anyone but a police officer to save them against a criminal with a gun or other lethal weapons. Some crimes are prevented because criminals do not know who may be carrying a firearm. Bumper stickers on their vehicles as well. Time to put up or shut up, I say.

Just curious any takers ?

F.B.I statistics," there is your capital letters", do not support the fantasy that gun carrying heroes are saving the day, or any one's life, including, your own. fact is, you all are making public areas like schools, theaters, malls, churches, etc, into future massacre sights. remember Dirty Harry ? how easily we forget, psycho case has access to high powered sniper rifle, Dead Girl, machine gun, cop shot, liquor store owner, brags about his gun to innocent enough looking customer, foolishly pulls it out, shows nut case, and gets beat over the head with bottle, robbed, and his gun is used to bus jack and kidnap a load of school students. A cop eventually kills him. remember Clint,? wayne lapeeair said it takes a good guy with a gun, to stop a bad guy with a gun. Newtown massacre creep killed himself, did that make him the good gun?